In all probability some radar geek/observer saw what he took to be a Saudi warship and his CO figured they'd lob a missile at it just for the hell of
it, I seriously doubt they would of intentionally attacked a USN vessel.

Also as for the missiles falling short when they allegedly have an 80km range seems a little bizarre although I'm not familiar with that weapons
system.

Stranger things have happened I suppose but even the craziest of fools would avoid such a provocation one would think.

ETA:
After reading the article it seems I confused the incident with one from Thursday. Looks like it's getting a little heated in the Red Sea.

There seems to be a lack of evidence that it actually happened . The Houthis are usually not shy to claim and film their larger attacks but claimed it
was not them . Even going by rumours that usually get spread around prior to most of their attacks has a silence in the back channels .

It may have been a kind of false flag to quell the pressure associated with support for SA and the bombing of the funeral that happened . By comparing
it to anything the Russians and Syrians are doing in East Aleppo it kind of puts the US and the UN in a hypocritical position .

That could be an indicator of shenanigans, perhaps...if it were the same location, they'd have disabled their radar two days prior at that location.
So no one from that location would be able to confirm anything either, if it were a location previously targeted specifically to disable its radar
capabilities. Then they can trot it out there like this to the public, vague and ambiguous as hell. Test the reaction and then spin the official
version to match whatever reaction they're going for. Just a speculative suggestion.

There are more than three radar sites in the area they hit. The three that were hit were the ones that were in use during the attacks on the Swift and
the first attacks on the Mason. That's why those three were targeted. They have since switched to other sites.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.